|
|
Post by electrohydra on Jul 30, 2015 9:26:28 GMT -5
Let's get a few things straight : -Hitting something with more DR then you have damage does not make you useless. See my example, a basic rifle user (max 24 damage) attacking a basic plate + shield user (26 armor) will still average out a little over 4 damage per round, factoring in reloading.
I don't see why guns need armor penetration. Swords don't get armor penetration, why would guns need them? Could they use a little more damage? Maybe.
Guns are, at least for the moment, not meant for soloing. So saying "I get one or two shots and then I'm in melee" is a little dishonest, because if you're in a party that won't happen. Now I do agree that ranged should do a little more damage then melee for this reason (Unless the meleer is a total glass canon, then the danger he puts himself in should be rewarded with great damage), but asking to be able to kill things solo before they reach you is just going to make the party experience a massacre.
Meleers use up more consumables, gunners have to pay for their ammo. In the end it evens out.
Nothing's stopping your melee-engaged gunner from wiping out a sword and hitting things with it. So they're not "useless" in melee, just less effective. (Personally I'd use sword and shield for it's awesome disengage abilities)
|
|
|
|
Post by Sobriquet on Jul 30, 2015 10:43:07 GMT -5
I'd like to see the different gun types become more balanced so they're all as effective as the hunting rifle for different situations, but I'm not sure gunners are altogether weak at the moment. My experience running the cultists last night was that hunting rifles were maybe doing the most damage or on par with two hand, they managed to stay alive the most, and the ranged attack came really in handy with running away and stealthing off.
|
|
Genbor
Gumshoe
"If you die, don't come crying to me about it."
Posts: 81 
|
Post by Genbor on Jul 30, 2015 10:43:14 GMT -5
Let's get a few things straight : -Hitting something with more DR then you have damage does not make you useless. See my example, a basic rifle user (max 24 damage) attacking a basic plate + shield user (26 armor) will still average out a little over 4 damage per round, factoring in reloading. I don't see why guns need armor penetration. Swords don't get armor penetration, why would guns need them? Could they use a little more damage? Maybe. Guns are, at least for the moment, not meant for soloing. So saying "I get one or two shots and then I'm in melee" is a little dishonest, because if you're in a party that won't happen. Now I do agree that ranged should do a little more damage then melee for this reason (Unless the meleer is a total glass canon, then the danger he puts himself in should be rewarded with great damage), but asking to be able to kill things solo before they reach you is just going to make the party experience a massacre. Meleers use up more consumables, gunners have to pay for their ammo. In the end it evens out. Nothing's stopping your melee-engaged gunner from wiping out a sword and hitting things with it. So they're not "useless" in melee, just less effective. (Personally I'd use sword and shield for it's awesome disengage abilities) I agree let's get a few things straight. Thanks to drunkensolamnic I now understand that 37 Armor is not flat, but has a roll of 1-37 unless with feats which increase it slightly so my example is invalid. Having said this, guns still need either more Damage or Armor Penetration, and of the two I think Armor Penetration is the better choice. Giving more damage to the gun will give it enough damage to help against heavily armored opponents, but it will be unfair against light armored foes, as they have little to no armor in the first place. Let me tell you something about bullets, since you seem to misunderstand. Melee also needs a buff, and I think what Fuzz said in the Melee thread is worth checking out, I advise you to visit that as well. The problem with bullets is that they are not simple pellets thrown with the strength of your hand, but they are small metal casings outfitted in a way to offer the best penetration possible. The larger the force on a small area, the bigger is it's penetration. This is why if you had to choose, you'd sit on a bed of needles instead of a single needle. Seeing how bullets are small, made so that they penetrate as well as are shot out with the power of exploding gunpowder, the force on a small area is incredibly high, therefore the penetration is great. Things that stop bullets are usually layered and are prepared in a special fashion. Having established that guns shooting bullets is in fact everything but sword swings, let's move on. 4 damage on average with 5 rounds to spare before reloading, and this only working when the opponent is not in melee is preposterous against a 100+ hp opponent. Don't even try to tell me it's alright. I get it that for the moment they are not meant for soloing, but what you are saying is also untrue. It depends on the composition of the party and how you play. Sure you can wait for the other person to try and tank the enemy, and once they have aggro you can attack, but I don't like doing that. Even unarmed is soloable, guns are not and I don't think that's fair at all, do you? I am simply proposing ways to make guns viable, as it is at the moment very clearly not. It doesn't matter what angle you are looking at it from, it can not be denied without throwing away reason. As you said, ranged should do "a bit more damage" than melee for these reasons: 1. You have finite bullets, with a finite clip that when empties, needs reload. 2. Reload in turn gives Attack of Opportunity because you are reloading. 3. Reloading therefore takes stamina, depending on your gun, it takes more than half of your stamina to reload. (5 bullets for a Hunting Rifle takes 3/4) 4. In melee range it is completely useless, so it needs an added oomph of stopping power, stopping power it currently does not have. 5. With a little over 4 damage on average against a lumbering heavy armor who has 100+ health, disregarding party compositions for PvM, and looking at PvP shows this result: Opponent sees gun>Laughs their asses off>Kills gunner. There's a lot of common sense on the way guns are handled, only when it came to damage why guns do damage the common sense seems to have fallen short in the current meta. Which is why we have this thread. Melee users indeed pay for consumables, gunners indeed pay for ammunitions, but it does NOT even out, not with that kind of damage output. With reload, it's essentially every shot consumes stamina, as opposed to a melee weapon which only consumes stamina if you use activated abilities, abilities ranged doesn't have. Also factoring in that you can use melee all the time, you just have to run up to the opponent, compared to guns which you can only use currently at a distance which can be easily covered, I most certainly believe it does NOT even out. As to your comment about nothing stopping my gunner of whipping out a melee weapon, well... Maybe you don't have a problem, but for starters as you level up, so does the opponent, and if you never use melee then your melee is a little bit less useless than your ranged. Next, I'd like to point out that melee is viable on it's own, so it's only fair guns should also be viable on their own, with a different strategy, and finally, if I wish to roleplay my character as a pure ranged person, I don't think I should be forced to play melee because the mechanics are not on par (yet). I'd ask you don't write off everything and give this thread the respect it deserves. Perhaps that's not how you wanted to write it, but it certainly came off that way. I understand you don't care about range, but there are a lot of people on the server who do, and that is why this thread exists.  |
|
|
|
Post by drunkensolamnic on Jul 30, 2015 10:47:05 GMT -5
I use a level 21 modded out Carbine myself. I haven't found the damage underwhelming, and at 2 shots per round, I can fire through most fights. Granted I do use this as a backup weapon for after I've had to vacate the front lines. I'm just thinking that maybe the usefulness of a larger clip is being overlooked for a 5% higher base damage.
|
|
Genbor
Gumshoe
"If you die, don't come crying to me about it."
Posts: 81
|
Post by Genbor on Jul 30, 2015 10:58:01 GMT -5
Indeed as backup weapons, Carbines are great. They have okay damage and a clip size of 20, and if the enemies are kept away from you, they work well enough. You know, a solution that could most likely negate most of the problems would be to give all guns free Point Blank Shot feats and be done with it, if we are looking at PvM. But if we are looking at PvP then suddenly that lack of damage becomes extremely important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rekov on Jul 30, 2015 11:24:11 GMT -5
At the risk of going full meta on this conversation, I have to wonder what you guys mean when you say "balance." It's not exactly a formal concept of game design. In short, what goal is not currently being met that you guys want to meet when it comes to guns?
I tend to approach balance like this: A game is balanced if all of the choices presented to players can be justified. Is there a reason to pick guns over melee? Player behavior seems to suggest there is. Is there a reason to pick SMGs over hunting rifles? Perhaps not.
Worry less over the numerical specifics. PWs are first and foremost role playing platforms. Were this League of Legends we would be far more justified in nitpicking the numbers, but in the end this is about role playing opportunities more than proficiency in combat.
So when it comes to 'balancing' guns compared to melee, focus on this: It's a bad thing for role play when characters don't perceive guns as a threatening weapon in character. That doesn't mean that gunfighters need to be able to solo dungeons, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingofaquilonia on Jul 30, 2015 12:13:57 GMT -5
At the risk of going full meta on this conversation, I have to wonder what you guys mean when you say "balance." It's not exactly a formal concept of game design. In short, what goal is not currently being met that you guys want to meet when it comes to guns? I tend to approach balance like this: A game is balanced if all of the choices presented to players can be justified. Is there a reason to pick guns over melee? Player behavior seems to suggest there is. Is there a reason to pick SMGs over hunting rifles? Perhaps not. Worry less over the numerical specifics. PWs are first and foremost role playing platforms. Were this League of Legends we would be far more justified in nitpicking the numbers, but in the end this is about role playing opportunities more than proficiency in combat. So when it comes to 'balancing' guns compared to melee, focus on this: It's a bad thing for role play when characters don't perceive guns as a threatening weapon in character. That doesn't mean that gunfighters need to be able to solo dungeons, though. I have to say I really don't like this kind of outlook on balance. This kind of attitude towards balance by the staff on my last server is what finally made me leave the server. Rekov is not staff I understand this(also not threatening to leave the server , just leading up to a point here). Numeric balance in a game is ALWAYS important. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to not try to balance things numerically. Yes we are all here to RP and have fun. Part of the RP does involve combat though and if your character who should be fairly capable is getting his or her ass beat because the spec they chose is just underpowered.... then that kills alot of the fun! In a beta especially I think the focus is on getting the numbers right. |
|
|
|
Post by Rekov on Jul 30, 2015 12:44:53 GMT -5
I didn't say that no efforts should be made to balance the game mechanically/numerically. I asked what you guys meant when you said that. What does your desired end state look like.
Do you want ranged characters to be equally proficient to melee characters in PvE? What does this mean? Equal ability to deal damage? Equal ability to tank? (Probably not, but why one and not the other, then?) Equal ability to solo?
Do you want ranged characters to be equally matched to melee characters in PvP? How on earth do you imagine you're going to go about doing that?
Do you want ranged characters to have to spend an equal amount of money on consumables in combat? Bullets for ranged, health potions for melee.
You will never come up with a set of numbers that satisfies all of those potential goals at once, so it is important to take a step back and figure out what you're trying to achieve. And I am not saying that we shouldn't try because it's impossible to get it perfect, either. Just that we should know what we are trying for. So far the discussion keeps coming back to just damage/round, and that isn't the end all be all of any kind of balance, including your numerical balance.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkensolamnic on Jul 30, 2015 13:15:49 GMT -5
Just a suggestion here; but part of the problem with the smaller guns is that they fire too many times a round to be useful. the SMG spray and pray fits.. but the hand-gun should probably be cut down to firing 3 times a round and the revolver cut down to firing twice. This will give everyone more rounds to shoot, getting higher average chances to hit with each shot. I know you can do this by canceling attacks after the first shot, but that gets very tedious and easy to end up moving by accident.
|
|
|
|
Post by nippon on Jul 30, 2015 13:59:38 GMT -5
We haven't really reached end game numbers. Ran cultists last night with a well balanced group of five. Tank medic dps. Two of our damage dealers were rocking guns and easily outdid our two hander. Granted they were using hunting rifles. Maybe we should stop trying to discuss penetration and focus on other ways to improve firearms so they all have a niche they can succeed in. Give smg a bleeding affect. Interchangeable specialized rounds for pistols? Yes please. Maybe make consecutive hits with carbines get extra damage until you miss, stacking to a capped amount. Hunting rifle .. Dunno. Maybe let that one have armor pen.
|
|
|
|
Post by judicator on Jul 30, 2015 14:25:25 GMT -5
The server still has a lot of growing left to do; that is, it's not certain what dungeons, what types of enemies are yet to come. We're projecting weapon balance based on what's in game now (which is all you can do), but it may be that "balance" is better achieved through introducing more enemy types v. adjusting the weapons themselves.
Is there a way to give a weapon a percent chance of a percentage of armor penetration per attack? I'd see that being applicable to spears, halberds, daggers, and certain firearms.
|
|
Genbor
Gumshoe
"If you die, don't come crying to me about it."
Posts: 81
|
Post by Genbor on Jul 30, 2015 14:33:07 GMT -5
If yoi go back a bit, you'll see that I did suggest Revolvers to have the same type of variation shotguns hatve except a less powerful bullet form. This of course if shotgun shells get fixed as well, at least I don't see a diiference between Military and regular shells yet. Shutgons could also have things like knockback/knockdown, Handguns having Point Blank Shot, etc., but this discussion could come later.
What Rekov gets right is to pick somewhere to start from, but its not Role-Playing as he seems to suggest. Starting with number crunching IS essential, as everything else, individual niches included can go from there. If the base is solid, the rest will follow.
Could you describe how they were fighting? If you still remember it of course, I can't expect you to remember every detail down to the tiniest speck, but it would still be nice to know. You said they were using Hunting Rifles, so I'm going to deduce that they had several Hunting Rifles on them, pre-loaded. This negates the need for reloading during battle for a while, and allows a 5 bullet gun to have a lot more, granted at the cost of Carry Weight and switching guns. Not too realistic, but it's a solution for what's been given by the mechanics at the moment.
So assuming they had three Hunting Rifles on them, with maybe Stamina leveled once or twice, they could essentially fire off 15 rounds and reload twice in rapid succession, making that a 25 "clip" Hunting Rifle.
What I'm mainly curious about is the armor of the opponents. Against Lightly armored foes, Hunting Rifles do well, and with what I mentioned above, as long as the party members keep the enemies at bay, it is possible to dish out some good dps.
Once you encounter heavy armored foes though, that damage is significantly halted, so I would be interested in some specifics there.
Although it's great, this is once again a party based experience, if you truly wish to feel what it's like to play a pure ranged character, I suggest you grab a gun and start shooting. Shrugging this off with, "Guns are meant for team-play" or "Well, just switch to a different weapon" are not going to solve the problem.
There are a few ways to addressing the problem:
- Giving all guns Point Blank Shot (since gun damage isn't great enough to warrant for balancing it so that close quarters combat is useless for them)
- Keeping the no Point Blank Shot approach but giving guns Armor Penetration, so that it's fair against lightly armored opponents not getting one-shotted, but also doing significant enough damage against armored opponents as well, before they get close.
- Giving guns activated abilities. Guns are the only weapon which has no such thing, and something like Power Attack in gun form would definitely be welcome, along with utility that slows, something that increases critical chance or ab of a gun temporarily, and unleashing a barrage of bullets as a melee touch action, like how Gunblade is doing right now as a secondary active.
These are all approaches I feel could help with the unfairness that guns are experiencing at the moment, but they do not exclude each other at all. All three of these could be implemented next to each other in one shape or form, and that's why number crunching is important.
As a hobby, I work as an indie game developer, and I also love taking game designs and picking them apart, to see what's good and what's not. Usually it's not even about that, but about what works, and guns don't at the moment, at least not how they COULD work, which in my opinion, would be a positive thing for everyone.
|
|
Brooker
Just Wandered In
The truth doesn't matter, It only matters what the people believe.
Posts: 25
|
Post by Brooker on Jul 30, 2015 15:22:19 GMT -5
Does range play as a factor in guns? Ie do rifles shoot further than pistols.
|
|
|
|
Post by nippon on Jul 30, 2015 15:22:20 GMT -5
Most of the cultists are armored to the gills. When damage was condensed to one target at a time we succeeded in quickly moving through the place. Hunting rifles were scoring crits in the high 60's. I'd like to see more use of other firearms though.
|
|
|
|
Post by nippon on Jul 30, 2015 15:43:49 GMT -5
Think one thing to keep in mind is that by end game one will be able to get an additional 15 damage or so.
|
|
